Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
.5% or so top rate that president obama wants to return to which we paid under clinton is very, very popular. republicans should ought not fall on that sword. the democrats are ed e ready to endorse 98% of the hated bush tax cuts. i would call that a win and toss the other 2% overboard. >> there's also a lot of talk here in washington, has been for a couple weeks about false confidence. the false confidence that happened at the end of the election there. the mitt romney people pretty much told a lot of us they were confident it was going to be a long night and that they would win. i want to read you something from the new republic about team romney's internal polling. says the biggest flaw in their polling was the failure to predict the demographic composition of the electorate. the people who showed up to vote on november 6 were younger and less white than team romney anticipated and far more democratic as a result. so i want to ask you, erick, is this sort of a misunderstanding generally that republicans have to address the next time they go into an election about who the voters are going
, not rates, and somewhat ideological, somewhat practical position on the obama side saying we can't get to $1.6 trillion without doing rates. now, we're not going to get to $1.6 trillion, so it becomes academic. >> can we get to $1.2 trillion where i think and others think we're going to end up without raising the rates? >> you can do it mathematically. it works. you can write laws that do it. the question you have to say to yourself, do you want to start eliminating charitable deductions for state and local taxes, for charitable, for health care, even, for retirement funds? in other words, do you really want to turn people's behavior kind of inside-out almost overnight by changing the way taxes work so quickly? >> mark, you're as plugged in as anybody in washington right now. are these guys talking to each other in a real, meaningful way? i know they put out the information that the president talked to john boehner yet, but are there real behind-the-scenes intense negotiations as we're now four weeks away from this thing? >> in talking to people so both sides yesterday, they had the identica
? >> wouldn't that be nice? how about return to the bill clinton era on capital gains rates? it was bill clinton who pushed it down. now president obama is pushing it way up. yet it would be nice to return to the basis of bill clinton, but that's not what we're doing. we're taking a little bit more here, a little bit more there, a little bit more over there. all to pay for all of this wonderful spending that the president wants. >> steve: maybe in four years when hillary runs for president. you have got to figure that's going to happen. >> i wonder what's going to happen to the economy. it's weak now, you raise taxes a little bit more, what happens to the economy? >> steve: so many people have been forecasting that the president does raise rates, couple of years ago, he said during a recession, that's the worst time to jack up rates. now we're not technically in a recession, but we're in a very soft edge. >> watch out, steve, 'cause here it comes, a little bit more. >> steve: thank you very much. stuart varney doesn't do show tunes, but does talk about the news of the day and politics an
well. and obama would be remiss not to try. go ahead, eugene. >> obama has talked about -- he phrased it as breaking the fever, i think, at one point. this sort of solid wall of adamanting opposition to any sort of tax rate increase ever in the house has been seen as a problem to him from day one. and coming off the election, he's in a stronger political position than he's been in before. his incentive is not to rush into the room, his strength is out among public opinion where that's friendlier terrain for him. whereas once they get in the room, of course, republicans still have power, still have control of the house. >> yeah. >> so there's no great incentive for him to rush to compromise at this point. >> gene, why is -- why is raising the top marginal rate so important to the president as well as liberals across america? why -- explain why the is that so important? >> well -- >> and i'm talking specifically the top marginal rate. not taxes on the rich. because the rich have been skating by for too long. i've said it it's immoral that billionaires pay 14% while people that do their
romney lost. obama won. the american people are very clear. that at a time when the middle class is disappearing and the people on top are doing phenomenally well and as warren buffett mind us, their effective tax rate is quite low. the wealthy are going to have to start paying their fair share of taxes. and i am happy to report to you what you already know. is that more and more republicans are catching on to that fact. >> but the republicans did maintain a significant majority in the house of representatives and it takes two to tango. >> absolutely. but i think the republicans are also good politicians. they have seen the polls, they have seen the election results and more and more republicans have been saying, you know what, we're going to have to ask our wealthy friends to start paying their fair share of taxes and do what we did in the senate, which is protect the bottom idea. >> but you're not open to any cuts in entitlement spending? >> well, first of all, social security, as most americans know -- >> what about medicare and medicaid? >> what you can do withmedicaid a lot
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)